The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Tijuana Brass (talk) 20:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kent Derricott (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

No evidence of notability. Reference provides no substantial information. Rtphokie (talk) 16:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: hopefully the following information will be useful in making a determination:

• He's well known enough as a gaijin tarento that the Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan/Gaijin tarento taskforce has his name on their frontpage of people who's articles need expanded/fixed
• He's well know in Japan that when the Japan Today asked random Japanese on the streets what they thought of gaijin, his name came up.[1]
• While not generally well covered in the US, the Deseret News in Utah (his home state) does articles on him periodically, which include the following: [2] [3]
• The Center for Japanese Studies of the University of Michigan has had him as a guest lecturer, and describes him here: [4]
• In preparing for the 2002 Olympics in SLC, the State of Utah discovered that the most mentioned association that Japanese have with Utah is Kent Derricott (as found at [5] on page 7)

-- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 23:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Extremely well known in Japan some years ago. Very visible "talent" who appeared as a guest on myriad television shows, and was on commercials. One of the "two Kents." Fg2 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —Fg2 (talk) 00:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• That may be, but this article makes no claim to notability other than being a "personality". If someone familiar with the subject can add in some content demonstrating why he is notable, along with an accompanying citation or two, then things will be fine. But as it stands, this article should be deleted; it's practically CSD A1. Tijuana Brass (talk) 00:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is much more information available in the Japanese version of the article, but it would need translation by someone who's Japanese is better than mine. Does it make sense to delete this stub at this point when there is an almost certainty that the article will be expanded to notability criteria? It's not that the subject is not notable, it's just that the article only has 2 sentences, as so is naturally missing the information necessary to substantiate this. -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 00:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep A very well-known gaikokujin tarento in Japan. --Saintjust (talk) 00:53, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I know it can't be used, but I was constantly asked if I knew Derricott when I was in Japan because I've lived in Utah. Everyone over there knows who he is, and I'm not exaggerating when I say everyone. I guess the 2002 Olympic study mentioned above bears this out. I added that as a reference to notability in the article. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The sources provided by Nihonjoe and 208.81.184.4 demonstrate notability of the subject. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - All right... so here we've got four people who've provided good reasons to keep this article, which I applaud, but the actual article has only changed by one sentence. Y'all, if you feel strongly about this article, it's far more helpful to edit it rather than merely post up keep reasons on an AfD. I understand that the Japanese article is difficult to translate, but there's material right here that could well be added. Speaking as an admin who closes AfDs from time to time, it's frustrating to see plenty of good keep reasons given but little to no effort made to actually improve an article by people who are knowledgeable on the subject. Personally, when I close, seeing efforts made to correct AfD-related issues are far more convincing to me than the opinions given in the AfD itself. So, please please pleasepleaseplease somebody put some of this familiarity with the subject to good use and expand the article itself.

...all right, done ranting. Just needed to vent about a common problem admins face when closing AfDs like this. There's such promising potential here that isn't being used. Tijuana Brass (talk) 23:56, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the problem though is that sometimes the article then gets deleted anyway, and you've done all that work for nothing. I suspect enough people have been burned by that to hold off until the deal is done. And then, alas, it drops off the plate. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:53, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the article a bit more with the information in those articles. I don't want to do it too much more, though, as any more might lead to plagiarism. I've hit the hilights, though. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One problem is that there's not obviously much to say about people who routinely jabber(ed) away about supremely ephemeral matters on low-budget television waidoshō and the like. Yes, you can list his appearances: in some ways, "talking heads" on Japanese TV are oddly similar to the bodies in Japanese "adult video". As I vaguely and perhaps wrongly recall, Derricott jabbered faster than and was less repellently unctious than Gilbert, and he had improbably dyed/blow-waved hair. When the TV antenna fell off the building over a decade ago, I never replaced it and I've never missed TV since. -- Hoary (talk) 02:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another thing to note is that Japanese pop-culture is no less (and arguably, even more) pervasive than US-ian pop culture; however, the number of editors who can dig up WP:RS on a few days notice is remarkably small, compared to the English language counterparts. Adding personal observations in the midst of an ongoing AFD is even more likely to get reverted out due to the fact that "I remember seeing it on TV" is not up to snuff as a WP:RS. Whereas millions of WP contributors watch programs such as Heroes or Lost, and the subsequent additions to the assorted character articles each week are rarely challenged, the same cannot be said for Japanese (or German, or Italian, or ....) subjects. The few of us who are actually familiar (for better or worse) with the everyday ramblings of the tarento know that the blatantly talentless bikini kankei nee guy is notable in Japan, and probably gets more airtime than Richard Hatch could ever dream of; but, that didn't prevent a recent AFD on his article. Derricott is no different in that regard -- people familiar with Japanese TV inherently know that he is notable; but, familiarity with the topic is often enough not a barrier to editing an article or expressing ones dissatisfaction that the topic is unnotable. Enough of my rambling... Neier (talk) 07:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if nothing else, the multiple books published by major publishers (or imprints of major publishers) qualify him as notable. He has also multiple video releases (where he is the star, either alone or with his family, such as ケント・デリカットのLet’s　Familing！(レッツ・ファミリング！)). ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 08:12, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's familing? Holy shit. Let's not: let's kiosk for some prophylactics. -- Hoary (talk) 13:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep obviously notable in Japan. Neier (talk) 07:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Any native speaker of English who stars in a video titled "Let's Familing" merits waterboarding an article. -- Hoary (talk) 13:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Heh. That has to be the best notability argument I've seen. —Quasirandom (talk) 17:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.